KHEM CHANDRA RAJWANSHI Vs. SATISH CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the landlord-respondent.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court has questioned the order passed by the Judge, Small Causes (Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mathura) in Small Causes Case No. 4 of 2006 on the ground of it being nullity for want of requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit. The judgment of the District Judge, Mathura in SCC Revision No. 14 of 2022 is also challenged for affirming the order of the trial Judge.

(3.) It transpires from the record that while the SCC Suit came to be filed in the year 2006 and remained pending disposal, an amendment was brought in vide notification of the State Government dtd. 7/12/2015 by the State raising pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) to Rs.25,000.00. While the petitioner did not questioned the continuance of the suit proceedings before Civil Judge (Senior Division) in a capacity of Judge, Small Causes, he suddenly filed a misc. application before the Judge, Small Causes that pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) having being raised, the matter was rendered triable only by that Court and, therefore, the matter be transmitted. The respective parties were heard upon the said application and that came to be rejected on the ground that amendment raising pecuniary limit being prospective in nature, would not be applicable to the pending suits. The said order was further challenged in revision unsuccessfully as the revision was dismissed on 9/11/2021 affirming the order of the trial Judge.